REDD Après Copenhague: La Voie À Suivre

This report by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) analyzes the state of REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) negotiations following the 2009 Copenhagen Conference (COP15). It outlines the outcomes of the Copenhagen Accord, the methodological guidelines for REDD-plus, and the critical technical and political challenges remaining for implementation, including monitoring, financing, and the protection of indigenous rights.

• The Copenhagen Accord provided political backing for REDD-plus, recognizing the need for positive incentives to mobilize financial resources from developed countries and establishing the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund to support mitigation activities, including REDD-plus.
• A proposed three-phase implementation process for REDD-plus was outlined: first, the development of national strategies, policies, and capacity building; second, the implementation of these policies and measures; and third, result-based actions.
• The report identifies a critical need to address the direct causes of deforestation—primarily agricultural expansion, logging, and infrastructure extension—to ensure REDD is effective and to prevent the displacement of emissions to neighboring landscapes.
• The implementation of REDD-plus requires strict social and environmental safeguards, particularly regarding the rights and participation of indigenous peoples and local communities, to avoid conflicts over carbon payments and land tenure.
• Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) systems are encouraged to follow a progressive approach based on IPCC levels: Level 1 uses default values (low cost/precision), Level 2 uses country-defined emission factors, and Level 3 uses high-resolution spatial data and complex modeling for maximum precision and monetization potential.
• There is a tension between developed and developing countries regarding institutional governance: developing countries prefer new institutions under the UNFCCC to avoid the management styles of the World Bank and Global Environment Facility (GEF), while developed countries prefer using existing institutions.
• Financing for REDD-plus is envisioned as a mix of grants for fast-start activities (with $3.5 billion promised by Australia, France, Japan, Norway, the UK, and the US) and long-term market-based mechanisms, such as carbon credits or auctioning of emission quotas.
• Agriculture is closely linked to REDD, as agricultural expansion is the primary cause of tropical deforestation (cited at 96%). Negotiations are ongoing to integrate agriculture into a new international climate agreement, focusing on the link between food security, adaptation, and mitigation.

APA

Minang, P. A., & Murphy, D. (2010). REDD Après Copenhague: La Voie À Suivre. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_after_copenhagen_fr.pdf

Chicago

Minang, Peter Akong, and Deborah Murphy. REDD Après Copenhague: La Voie À Suivre. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2010. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_after_copenhagen_fr.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Minang |first1=Peter Akong |last2=Murphy |first2=Deborah |title=REDD Après Copenhague: La Voie À Suivre |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=February 2010 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_after_copenhagen_fr.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{minang2010redd, author = {Minang, Peter Akong and Murphy, Deborah}, title = {{REDD Après Copenhague: La Voie À Suivre}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2010}, month = feb, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_after_copenhagen_fr.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }